Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Why is John Kerry Afraid of Ed O’Reilly

By

OK I’ve been enjoying the back and forth here about the Senate Primary.  It kind of reminds me of the good old days between Beatty and Ogo on RMG.  However this recent article by the AP onWCVB-TV5.

Sen. John Kerry says he has instructed his campaign manager to discuss the “modalities” of a debate with his re-election challenger but he’s not necessarily going to debate fellow Democrat Edward O’Reilly.

Kerry said Senate business and his own statewide campaign schedule have kept him from taking up O’Reilly’s initial challenge for 23 debates.

Now, with less than a month until the Sept. 16 primary, Kerry says his campaign manager will have to see if he can negotiate any agreement with the Gloucester attorney.

During a campaign stop Monday in Worcester, Kerry said that even with those discussions, he “just may not necessarily be able to” debate.

What is John Kerry afraid of?  I’ve advocated avoiding debates with the underdog for as long as possible, but come on, there are four weeks left.  Couldn’t you at least do what Ted Kennedy did for Ken Chase, a 5 minute mini debate on NECN? Geez the hubris of this guy is amazing.  

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • don’t you.  I can see the whole summer thing, but now with less than a month.  Work something out.

        • unimpeachable political virtues that EaBo holds.  Certainly his comments are consistant with the civic minded discourse he is so famous for.  

          <

          p>Besides nothing would make Eabo happier than the very slim chance Kerry is mauled by a O’Reilly.  

  2. I'd be interested to know what kind of "Senate business" Kerry has, now with the Senate adjourned.   And god forbid, he may have to take a day off in his full "campaign schedule" – ie. going to Dunkin' Donuts and patting peoples heads.   It's one thing to avoid a debate because you don't want to give your opponent face time or answer hard questions, its quite another to lie through your teeth on TV.

    <

    p>Is this what the activists on BMG work for? Entrenched incumbency, insulation, lies, Nantucket fundraisers, political commercials about the Red Sox (cus you know, we commoners like um')?It's pathetic.

    <

    p>  

    • should just set the time, hold the debate, and if kerry is a no-show, it’s his problem.  think anyone would come if kerry didn’t participate?

      • and invite both candidates trying to work it around a date and time that works for them.  If one of them doesn’t show up then it should just be an hour or two of free press.  That seems fair.

      • to convince a venue or media outlet to host a debate without consent of the Kerry campaign. But I agree with what Paul says below–>

        <

        p>I think it is also the responsibility of the media to host a debate or ‘issue forum’ , invite both candidates, and talk to whoever shows.  

        • that i’m not convinced many people are actually much interested in what oreilly has to say.  he can;t draw much of a crowd himself (and can’t afford the venues) so he needs kerry to draw a free crowd for him.  for oreilly, it’s not just about the real debate, it’s about free publicity.  and he knows that kerry doesn’t need the free publicity.  bummer when you’re relying on your opponent to help promote your own campaign!

          • Kerry also has an interest to not go to a debate where he would be called out on some of his policy stances just as O’Reilly has an interest for one for the publicity.

            <

            p>And there’s nothing wrong with that.  That’s politics and those are their interests, but the interests of the people lay in hearing from both candidates since there will be 2 options in September.

            • And you may be correct, for all I know.  But you must admit that there is probably a big self-serving element in this for O’Reilly too, that goes way beyond what embarrassing questions he might ask Kerry.

              • What I’m saying is that they both have their political interests.  Sure, O’Reilly probably has more to gain than Kerry would lose and that’s exactly why Kerry is dodging a debate.  

                <

                p>What I’m saying is regardless of their interests, which I acknowledge, there is the interests of the people to see both candidates debate to make an informed decision.

                <

                p>And there’s ways to play around with that to maximize it to each candidate’s benefits.  Kerry would want short and few debates.  O’Reilly would want many and long debates.  However, the bottom line is that the people deserve a debate between the two, whatever the logistics are.

            • and you’re for a debate with Kerry for purely PR/media purposes, OK. But if you’re an Ed supporter and you actually think a debate against Kerry is a solid idea from an “Ed can win” standpoint, you’re crazy.

              <

              p>Who do think is going to be asking the questions? Ed? Barney Keller? Howie Carr?

              <

              p>Kerry is a US Senator, his policy positions are pretty well known. It’s Ed who’s never explained in any sort of detail his positions on a very, very wide range of issues. It seems like the Ed supporters assume the debate is going to be some sort of crazed back and forth and that Ed is going to somehow “win.” (I can just see Ed biting his lip, waiting for that magical moment when he gets to say for approximately the 8 billionith time- “Robert Schrum, who was Kerry’s chief political adviser, wrote in his book…” ugh)

              <

              p>I just don’t get the reasoning there. I doubt Ed O’Reilly has ever even participated in a debate before, let alone one that’s televised and against a sitting U.S. Senator who has shone in previous debates. And please don’t try to equate Ed’s legal experience to a debate- they are completely different animals.

              <

              p>You don’t get called out for policy positions in a debate- you get called out because you’re unprepared and uninformed and unable to fully explain how you’ll make your positions a reality. Who does that sound like?

              <

              p>John Kerry debating Ed O’Reilly is like Michael Phelps competing in the Special Olympics.

    • is the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that overseas The near east and south Asia. Now, before you talk boondoggles, the countries include vacation spots like Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Israel, India, and Sri Lanka.

      <

      p>That might also explain the vagueness. He typically does not announce details of these trips in advance, nor do other members going to such places.  

      • WASHINGTON, D.C. – Sen. John Kerry today released the following statement in response to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf’s decision to resign:

        <

        p>”President Musharraf’s decision to step aside is a welcome development for the people of Pakistan. His resignation is the latest reminder of the perils of this Administration’s personality-driven foreign policy that turned a blind eye to Pakistan’s people. President Bush and Vice President Cheney backed a discredited dictator, which has undercut our ability to work with the new government to eliminate the terrorist sanctuary that has reemerged in Pakistan’s tribal areas. Pakistan’s politicians must shift their focus from each other to preventing al Qaeda and Taliban forces from seeking safe havens from which to launch their next attacks. Over the long-term, the best way to fight extremism is for Pakistan’s politicians to use this opportunity to strengthen their democracy and deliver an economic plan that can improve the lives of their people. This ultimately is their fight and their future, but for their sake and ours, America needs to help them succeed.”

        <

        p>Sen. Kerry is a senior member of the Committee on Foreign Relations and chairs the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs, which has jurisdiction over matters in Pakistan. Last week, Kerry spoke with the leadership of Pakistan’s coalition government.

        <

        p>http://kerry.senate.gov/cfm/re…

    • his own worst enemy.

      <

      p>If they don’t debate it will be because of Ed O’Reilly’s inept handling of the issue from the beginning.  Starting with the fact that he waited nearly 2 months after making it onto the ballot before even ASKING for debates.  Then turning it into this game where he refused to negotiate with Kerry’s campaign manager, and would ONLY talk to John Kerry himself.  Which is NOT how debates are scheduled.  Then he goes all over the state complaining that KERRY won’t negotiate with him, when the KERRY CAMPAIGN has been doing so from the beginning, or trying to at least.

      <

      p>I think the truth is the opposite of the title of this diary.  Ed O’Reilly doesn’t want to debate Kerry at all; he much prefers the “debate about the debates” safely done from his easy chair.

      <

      p>

      • Here’s a Gloucester Times article from June 10th.

        <

        p>A couple of snippets:

        <

        p>

        Coming off a respectable showing at the state Democratic Party convention, Gloucester attorney Edward O’Reilly yesterday challenged U.S. Sen. John Kerry to a series of debates and town meeting-style forums across Massachusetts.

        <

        p>

        Roger Lau, Kerry’s campaign manager, said it was too early to discuss a debate schedule.

        <

        p>I really don’t know where you’re getting this “O’Reilly doesn’t want to debate” mantra.  If that’s the case, all Kerry has to do is say when he’s available for a debate and that issue will be solved.  huh, he isn’t.

        • and actually contacting the other campaign manager to begin the process.

          <

          p>It’s just the way it works, Paul. Really doesn’t matter the level- campaign staffs handle debate negotiations.  

          • Roger Lau, Kerry’s campaign manager, said it was too early to discuss a debate schedule.

            <

            p>It sure sounds like the campaign manager was contacted.

    • “But every day that this character invokes the smears of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and channels the Massachusetts GOP in his personal attacks, you wonder more and more whether his campaign is based on anything but character assassination.”

      <

      p>I watched the NECN interview, and all O’Reilly stated was his interest in debating Kerry.  

      • as a diversion.  Call it “muddying the waters” or “obfuscating”…it’s a verbal sleight of hand to help avoid answering the real question – why won’t our Senator have a debate and how worthy is he of our vote?  

        <

        p>It’s kind of sad, really.  He should be going like gangbusters; happy and confident, shaking hands and kissing babies… instead of pretending like he’s just above it all.  

        • He has been campaigning and meeting with voters.

          <

          p>As to mentioning SBVT, it may have angered Kerry’s staff and perhaps Kerry himself, that O’Reilly told the Boston Globe that the SBVT charges go to Kerry’s credibility. This when both Republicans said they wanted nothing to do with the SBVT. When called on that statement on the Daily Kos, O’Reilly listed things he thought Kerry needed to prove, which to me puts him in the SBVT category.

          <

          p>There are many sitting Senators who do opt not to debate challengers who are completely not competitive. Why give ammunition to the Republican Kerry will face in November? Hillary Clinton never debated Tasini, who was as credible as O’Reilly.

          • and I don’t think either case is acceptable (you know, two wrongs…?).

            <

            p>But a key difference is that Tasini-at least to my knowledge- did not need to reach a threshold at the NY Dem convention to get on the ballot. O’Reilly crossed two hurdles- including an affirmation of legitimacy from Democratic party insiders. I think it is a huge disservice to Democrats for the Kerry campaign to ignore that vote and shy away from a debate on the issues.  

            • Here is the New York Times account of election day – http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09…

              <

              p>I cited that case because it was the most prominent and comparable case. One difference is that Tasini did not bring up RW smears of Clinton – and O’Reilly has.

              <

              p>Though O’Reilly got on the ballot, Kerry got 78% of the vote. Some of O’Reily’s votes per news reports were people angry that Kerry endorsed Obama. This is not a competitive race and given that O’Reilly has at times channeled Howie Carr, it could be better for Kerry not to give him a forum that he can’t get himself.

              • I was at the convention and two people seated directly in front of me had EOR t-shirts on.  When questioned about their support for EOR, they said it was due to Kerry endorsing Obama.  Ed’s 22% showing at the convention had more to do with revenge against Kerry than support for O’Reilly…

                • Who’s displaying a logical fallcay, me or the folks in front of me with the EOR t-shirts?

                • 2 out of 580 people who voted for EOR is 0.3% of his supporters that day.

                  <

                  p>And yet you say,

                  <

                  p>

                  Ed’s 22% showing at the convention had more to do with revenge against Kerry than support for O’Reilly.

                  <

                  p>oh I’m going to do so well on the LSAT…

                • …and it validates the newspaper reports that stated the same conclusion.  Good luck with your LSAT!

      • Throughout his campaign, O’Reilly has repeatedly echoed the Rove Republican talking points on Kerry. It’s not hyperbole- it’s Ed being Ed.  

          • I really don’t think this is a difficult concept to grasp. O’Reilly’s NECN appearance led to a question but it’s pretty clear that the quote references the campaign to date and not just Ed’s NECN appearance.

            <

            p>And unless you’re the reporter who asked her the questions, I really don’t think you’re in a position to say she didn’t answer the question.  

      • brought up the SBVT lies – http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

        <

        p>Now, O’Reilly could have said his Boston Globe comment was wrong and that he shouldn’t have said it. Instead he wrote:

        <

        p>”All John Kerry needs to do is release his original discharge papers showing whether or not he was honorably discharged or was given a general discharge. It is really that simple.  Once he produces the honorable discharge at the time of his discharge, together with the “exit interview”, all of this will be past us.  

        <

        p>Since John Kerry now has the portfolio and all of the t’s are crossed and the i’s dotted, I assume John Kerry now has that documentation.  He should just show it and end this issue and move on.  We don’t need more division.

        <

        p>As I said, credibility is at issue and I want John Kerry to take the high road and show his crediblity and show the Honorable Discharge Papers he must now have.” http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

        <

        p>The fact is that Kerry signed a release in 2005 so teh Boston Globe and 2 other papers would directly get his entire file. They reported that the Navy records were EXACTLY the records that Kerry had on his website for over a year after they were posted in April 2004. (There was one page Kerry didn’t have – a coversheet that recommended accelerated promotion.

        <

        p>There is no problem with Kerry’s discharge and there never was. O’Reilly apparently forgot that he was a Democrat and decided to join the freepers saying Kerry did not release his record. (link to comment – All John Kerry needs to do is release his original discharge papers showing whether or not he was honorably discharged or was given a general discharge. It is really that simple.  Once he produces the honorable discharge at the time of his discharge, together with the “exit interview”, all of this will be past us.  

        <

        p>There are many RW smears in that post.

        <

        p>In addition note he whines that Kerry is in South Africa on vacation. He actually was on a Senate trip where he was doing oversight on the AIDS in Africa program that he was an  early sponsor of. http://www.kerryvision.net/200…

        <

        p>

    • If O’Reilly was lying, then all Kerry would have to do to prove himself would be to say what date and time he’s willing to debate.  That hasn’t happened.

      <

      p>Not to mention that even the media is calling out John Kerry for it too.

      • would any Senator.  Their campaign managers do that.  The same campaign manager, Roger Lau, who Ed O’Reilly refuses to negotiate with.

        <

        p>Ed doesn’t want debates.  He just wants a debate about the debates.

        <

        p>Seems to me Ed is treading on thin ice now, and needs to decide whether he is serious about a debate or not.  Tick Tock.  Time is running out.

  4. Sweet, how ’bout the same 6 people post the exact same things we’ve been writing for weeks? This should be some riveting Internet action.  

        • but this Kerry/O’Rielly intra-party battle is like patty-cake compared to the Ogo/Beatty battles.  In retrospect, the Ogo/Beatty battles had to in as early as they did becuase RMG would have blown up if the fierce war continued.  Man it was great…only in the republican Party of Massachusetts.  

          • We don’t have Ken Pittman.

            <

            p>However, if the Republican party keeps drifting to the right, it might not be long until we do.

      • Just shoot me the contact information for Ed’s campaign manager and I’ll get the ball rolling.  

  5. Honestly, what does this guy do all day? It’s an absolute mystery to me. He shows up to BBQ’s every now and then but it’s not like there are BBQ’s scheduled all day every day.

    <

    p>And I’m being serious. I am so intrigued by Ed O’Reilly’s daily schedule. Is he knocking on doors? Is he playing Wii with Cambridge Paul? Is he taking one of his many trips to Costa Rica? Is he being vetted to be Obama’s VP?

    <

    p>Has anyone in the BMG community ever seen Ed O’Reilly at an event that didn’t offer free food?  

    • First there’s finding one.  Then there’s getting to it.  Then there’s beaing at it.  Then there’s getting home.  Then there’s getting the sauce stains off your shirt.  Must I go on?  I’m starting to think, Masshole, that you don’t know the first thing about the daily grind that is campaigning for US senator.  sheesh.

    • After all we know he isn’t fund raising as he said that would cut into the time when he is out campaigning. He doesn’t seem to have much of an organization that he is working on strategy with. He doesn’t seem to be good at multitasking.

  6. I have some questions. It’d be good to get the facts straight before launching into opinion:

    • Apparently, O’Reilly (or his campaign) sent a request to Kerry’s campaign. Kerry’s campaign responded. I’m hearing that O’Reilly was slow to respond. True or not true?
    • I hear, but I have not seen evidence yet, that O’Reilly insists on arranging this with Kerry directly and not through intermediaries. How do we know this is the case?
    • What’s the story behind O’Reilly not having a campaign manager? First is this true? Second does this represent a new, innovative approach to campaigning, or is it because O’Reilly has trouble recruiting and retaining campaign managers?

    • EOR was at all of them – but he was almost always alone.  Never mind a campaign manager, he didn’t even have a handler with him!  That’s not a good impression of a candidate for the US Senate, at least IMHO…

Archives